I think you should read my comment a little more closely. PARALLELPIPED not parallelogram. Also it is true a parallelogram can be a rhombus, but the side of the ps4 is not a rhombus. Here is the definition:
Rhombus - A parallelogram with opposite equal acute and obtuse angles and four equal sides.

The angles satisfy the definition, but the unequal sides kill your reasoning, UNLESS you are referring to the top of the PS4, which is square and therefore rhombus, but saying this is too blatant.

But that doesn't matter because you were comparing black boxes to a rhombus which makes no sense because you are comparing a 3D object to a 2d object. The best comparison is parallelpiped which is in the picture I provided.

The thing is, people are STILL going to defend it, they are STILL going to say "Oh it's not that bad" and if M$ make enough money from it, they'll take it one step further every time another way to **** people in the ass rolls around again.

It's basically Apple all over again. It's not the best, and it's the most expensive of its type on the market, but people will still buy it thinking its better because they can't possibly be wrong.

Of course people are going to defend it, because Microsoft is just a better company. Sony is nearly bankrupt from making the PS4, and has nothing to show for it, other than insulting Microsoft.
It's WORSE than Mac users who say Windows is evil. You're absolutely right, though, in this case, the Xbox is more expensive but it's actually better. Last Gen the PS3 was more expensive, and it was the most anticipated console and it sold less than the Wii.
Microsoft would never Nickle and Dime people, at least not NEARLY as bad as Sony would, Microsoft HAS money, Sony is RELYING on this console to SAVE them.
It's like Apple, in that people Look at the PS4 and say "Hey, look how neat this PS4 is, it MUST be better than the other, more reliable options. I should know, I had a PS2, and that thing was neat as well."

Neither console is better. That is a subject of opinion. The PlayStation had better hardware specs but a problematic processor that developers didn't like working with. The XBox 360 forced you to pay in order to do anything at all online but most certainly had more diversity in its game selection.

Sony is NOT a gaming company. It is an electronics company. To say the PS4 is their savior is idiotic; they make so much profit from their headphones, laptops, televisions, etc. that selling fewer PS4s than expected would be a drop in their bucket.

After all this time, I still think if's ******** that Xbox Live is a paid service and PSN isn't. Why would you try to put a positive spin on "Remember how pissed off we were that we had to pay to play online? Well, now we're kind of used to it! " ?

That's the main issue for me. It's been over 7 years since the Xbox 360's release. That means that someone who's paid for online since then has spent £280 on it. That means that if Microsoft didn't charge for online, you could have bought 2 Xbox 360s, at the time of their release, and paid the same.

think of it like this, you are renting an apartment, your job doesn't pay well, you have lots of free time, so you get internet and then you think about getting a console after saving up money for it if you got the Xbox 360 or Xbox one you have to pay extra for Xbox live but if you get ps3 or ps4 no extra online usage fees.

Except PSN+ also gives you a free game every week and a free AAA title every month. Let's assume 52 weeks at $10 per week is $520 in free games. Let's throw on top the AAA title which is 12 at about $30 (they're not brand spankin' new) and that's another $360 annual. So with your $50 subscription you get $880 worth of free stuff a year. That's not adding in the coupon deals and such - since Xbox Gold does that too.

Seems like they give back plenty to make the subscription worth it. Gold isn't too bad itself, but it's still $880 less worth it.

That's a straw man:
Microsoft has had countless server intrusions. More than not they don't tell the public about them, and nobody tells anyone. Thus, they are invisible. Sony outright says "we got hacked. We're so sorry" and they're the bad guys?

You seem to be the one not thinking for yourself. Or at least not thinking very hard.

You really want to argue with me over the tech industry? Let me fill you in on what I do for a living. It's two fold: game development and neural prosthetic software engineering. I know a bit about this stuff.

I know for a fact that Microsoft has had some serious problems, some as bad as Sony's PSN fiasco. Some actually caused damage to customers. Microsoft isn't as public with the information because they're a purely technical company. How safe would most people feel that their OS' developers can't protect their own servers, let alone their customers' computers. It's a good thing that Microsoft doesn't announce it, but it doesn't make it any less true.

Also the PSN hackers did barely anything. They went in, scanned a couple files, and left a file called "Anonymous" that said "We are Legion". Not a single credit card company reported fraudulent charges on a single card on the list. As a result of this break-in, Sony did a major overhaul of their entire security protocol, asked virtually every user to change their passwords (since that's what was scanned), gave out free games, made public apologies, and then it was dropped. Ultimately, it cost Sony a lot, but PSN users only benefited with the free games and tighter security.

And before you say "close enough" - no it's not. Sony couldn't ASSURE themselves that credit cards weren't accessed. Thus they assumed they were. Thus they told the public. However, the way the PSN database is structured, the files accessed by the hackers were in a completely separate server than the files in which credit card information and such is stored. It would have required far more effort to break in, and a great deal of skill to do so without being caught. There was virtually no risk - but it wasn't possible to prove it was absolutely no risk, so they chose to play it safe.

Welcome to the tech industry. The biggest disasters are never known, and we cover all grounds just in case.

> You're the one defending Microsoft saying they're so much more secure than Sony. I'm saying that's a load of utter ****. In fact, the methods of security on the Xbox servers and the PSN servers are actually pretty much the same. Slight variations, yes, but nothing major.

> Who said anyone has **** for security other than you? I remember you bringing up how bad Sony's servers are.

> No, that's not why you'd be concerned for security. What do you do for a living, it obviously can't be anything even close to this industry. Jesus... I... I can't even address how stupid this paragraph is. It is just completely ignorant of all business and technical common sense. Just... ****. Read a ******* book sometime. If you had ANY idea what you are talking about, that last sentence would bring tears to your eyes and your body cringe in pain.

The only thing I got from being hacked is 2 free games. There was no downside for me.

Also, I'm not sure if I've misread this... That's my problem if I don't LIKE to pay? Of course I don't like to pay. If it were down to me, I would get everything for free and I'd be typing this to you from my castle. It's not a choice once you have the Xbox. Want to play online? Well then, you have to pay, whether you like it or not.

I didn't say that everything was free in that scenario. I said that "I would get everything for free", which refers only to me. Also, by that, I mean by whatever methods including things magically spawning for me. It's just an example to emphasise that paying for things isn't always about liking to pay it.

No PSN bills
There will be, but not at this very second, so that's something.
Also, I'm pretty sure you get free games and money off stuff with PS Plus, although I've never bought it myself because I try to avoid spending money on anything ever.

I think they started doing this on live also, fable 3 (not what I would call a AAA title, but still entertaining) was free on the marketplace just yesterday, I hear Halo 3 is next week. and there's demos on xbox live market as well...and there have been for a few years now. you can occasionally get coupons on xbox rewards.

I could be wrong about the free games though, that could just be a promotion, for a few weeks or something. but the xbox rewards thing has been around since 2011, and they've been doing the demos since...I wanna say at least 2008 maybe 2009.

There is NOT going to be offline play unless you sign in once every 24 hours.

The XBox One has decent features, but who will be the first people to purchase the console? Gamers, and they get a couple exclusives but nothing the 360 didn't already support. Take away the mandatory log-in, mandatory Kinect, and inability to use used games, and you've got something that I would definitely say is worth the price you'd pay.

What about people with no internet? I know that realistically, someone would get an internet connection before they bought a game console but what if I wanted to take my Xbox One up to a cabin with me? Has electricity and all that **** but no internet. What the **** do I do now? The idea of not being able to play unless you have an internet connection is the stupidest **** I've ever heard. Nothing can justify this addition to the system. It is pointless and retarded.
TL;DR This "feature" is bad and Microsoft should feel bad.

for me the mandatory log in thing is actually quite a big issue because I often take my console to a cabin in the woods (its normal in norway) where there is no internet. so if i'm going to be staying there for more than 24 hours the xbox won't allow me to play anymore and i must say that's pretty ****** up.

People whine, bitch, and complain about everything, so yes, I'm complaining about this. A mandatory check-in once a day is absolutely stupid and absolutely unnecessary. Once a week or once a month would be far less annoying. I'm not on my PS3 once every day, but I can be guaranteed to play it every week.

Let me just point out a couple things:
> Sony isn't a bad company. They were amazing a couple years back. However recent CEO's threw away good business and ethical practices and now even the Japanese don't buy Sony electronics because they feel ashamed of the price/quality ratio. Their most recent CEO is actually a really cool guy and is trying to fix his predecessors problems. His first declaration was a transition from electronics to entertainment. AKA the PS4 is the focus of their existance. Their new music service, the PSN, smart TVs and making movies - those are their business now. And they're doing them very well. I put stocks in a while ago and they boomed almost 70% up at the first PS4 release. They soared at E3.

> Sony is not a nickle and dime company. They have always been those to provide high quality at the lowest price point. They are an amazing company on a whole and often take the high road relative to what would make them money. For instance PS3 had free online - with the PSN+ providing free titles and a bunch of sales and extra content. Sure the PS4 needs PSN+ for online, but it makes sense since servers cost SO much and they're making so many games now.

Microsoft, on the other hand, has a habit of nickle and diming everyone possible. This isn't necessarily bad - they give back quite a bit of that money in terms of innovation in the computer world or simply through donations to other companies/charities. But they're still a very greedy business. Far more than Sony.

agreed. the whole thing was them patting them selves on the back going "good ******* job guys, look how amazing we are" and all they have to show for it was ******* COD and kenect?
after pushing it back a month to "respond to sonys ps4 launch" that was the best they could do?

How exactly are you supposed to play her? I only use Auron/Tidus/Lulu/Wakka, never use Kimahri/Rikku. I built Kimahri torwards/into Rikku's starting path with thief abilities early on so I just don't see a need for her.

See, I spent so much time leveling her she went all the way through Auron's tree, Titus' tree, Lulu's tree, Yuna's Tree, and Khimari's tree, I didn't let that filthy Wakka tree touch my beautiful blonde angel.

To be honest. i'm afraid haha. I love the action scenes and all but i don't want it to be like
"Oh i hit X and hit him 92 times then smashed his face into a table"
Other than that i preordered it a couple months ago and ive been in hyper sleep since this game was first announced.... I had to wake up today to clean my room.